Sorry results were late. I'll set up the new debates that have been requested shortly.

We will not be having judged debates for a bit, just opening threads up for comment and allowing all fighters to give their opinions (which can now be
done with the debates that have had winners announced as well). Input and ideas on if or how judging should be done in the future is welcome- I'm not
entirely happy with the judging situation as it stands now.

There's a lot of work to do, running the debate forum, and I'd like to propose a new judging method.

I'd really like to see the debating forum take off again. There are members out there who wish to debate, for nothing less than the mental exercise.
With no time limits, there's no hurry to be overwhelmed by the necessity to reply to your opponent, so I suggest taking a lower key, but keep the
debates going. Personally, I like the opportunity to think about my opponents reply, and I enjoy doing the research. My work schedule doesn't allow
me 24/7 access to the net, but that doesn't prevent me from thinking about topics in the interim.

I propose a shift in the judging paradigm. Turn it over to a set of fighters who have the time to dedicate to reading the debates. Ask formally for
volunteers. I would be one, maybe beezzer, but we need to see who would volunteer.

Then, make it a double tally. Each post in a debate gets stars, then the panel of three volunteer members make their comments, after the debate is
over, and then the winners are decided by stars. Each set of three volunteers preside over an individual debate. The groups of member judges can
vary from debate to debate, but the actual winner of the debate will solely be decided by the tally of stars in all the five posts in the thread,
added to the star tally of the panel of judges that voted for them.

This is not a time intensive responsibility. As a volunteer judge, one of three residing over a single debate, and with no time limits, being a
debate judge will be a casual experience. You will need to read the debate, and after it is over, post a comment as to why you picked your winner.
You'll get stars for your vote, and they will be tallied up with the stars the opponents got throughout the entire debate.

All previous rules apply.

The debate thread will need to state the three member judges so they adhere to their responsibility, and in this thread, people can say (volunteer)
that they would be a judge in the creation of a new debate thread.

That makes it a bit more complicated. Not only do you have to find a debate partner, you now have to find three judges.

But honestly, if two other members decide on a debate, I would post a reply "Judge one reporting in." All the member would then have to do is u2u
The Vagabond with the premise, the debate partner, and the three members that would be doing the judging.

Thus said, I guess I should ask how many members would volunteer to judge? (I will.)

It's not that there was a problem, it's a lack of volunteers to help. It was popular for a while, having competitions, but then the interest waned
and the debates got stagnant. The Vagabond stepped up. We only had one debate until like June of this year, and now there have been five, and
requests for many more. A new wave of people are interested.

With the new demand, others have to step up to keep it going. Will you volunteer to be a judge? The only requirement is that you look at both sides
of the debate neutrally, and pick the winner from the best argument. That, and post a good reason why you think a particular member won.

Well, The Vagabond is in charge, so we'll have to wait to see what he has to say.

My primary concern is to keep the debates going on, and he asked for ideas. I've presented something feasible, and if there's enough interest, it
may work out. At least on a trial basis. I'd say a month trial period would be sufficient to test it out.

I'll quite happily put up my hand and time to judge. It gives us something new to read in the interim between our own debates, and let's face it, if
you're like me since I joined the debate forum I have been reading everyone's debates with interest, so we're over half way there already.

Originally posted by Druid42

Then, make it a double tally. Each post in a debate gets stars, then the panel of three volunteer members make their comments, after the debate is
over, and then the winners are decided by stars. Each set of three volunteers preside over an individual debate. The groups of member judges can
vary from debate to debate, but the actual winner of the debate will solely be decided by the tally of stars in all the five posts in the thread,
added to the star tally of the panel of judges that voted for them.

This is about the only thing I could be in disagreement with. The stars and flags system works somewhat, but just to clarify, you are proposing the
winner is based on the sole number of stars they receive in a thread as the outright winner? It just seems to me the more popular posters would be
receiving the lion's share of stars from their fellow peers, making it a bit lopsided for newer members to get a foothold. If however, the stars are
based on the three judges decisions in each posting or rebuttal, and tallied at the end with judging points as has been in the other debates so far,
then it seems a lot fairer. Maybe even judges adding a comment as to which post or rebuttal receives a point each round, and then tallied at the end.
It makes judging seem more like judging points and not popularity.

In the meantime I'd like to see the next round of debates up and running soon. I'm keen to get another one going, just not 100% sure on a topic just
yet. If anyone wants to get another ball rolling, hit me up

As you have already pointed out, judging the winner of any debate by stars is scewed because stars can be given for arguing in favor of someones
already held beliefs or because of popularity, rather than only based on quality of debate.

I propose that stars have nothing to do with deciding a winner.

I like your idea of a panel of three judges per debate, actually it was something I was going to suggest anyway. What we need to do is look for the
best debaters in the forum, and see if they wont judge debates. Debate is something that is an art unto itself, and those who know best the art should
be the ones judging it.

We have wonderful debaters on the forums also who are not necessarily a part of the debate forum, one in particular who comes into mind here is
Slayer69. He does know debate well, even if he can be mean

(jk) We can consider expanding our horizons to look for judges outside the debate forum.
Those people probably have less freindships with the debaters and are more likely to be completely neutral when judging. Not that I think any of us
would be biased judges, but it is another possibility.

rather than putting all our eggs in one basket, we should have two or three panels of judges, so that one group of people is not taking all of their
time in just judging the debates.

For now, my suggestion is that we all pitch in and either message Vagabond (or comment in the threads he opens) with our critisizims/kudos for the
debates with our reasoning, and this would make it easier for Vagabond to decide a winner until we have some set judging panels. If that would be ok
with him.

And of course, I am happy and willing to be a judge. I think all of us would be.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.